Where India truly lives, democracy struggles-yet quietly strengthens

I was neither born in a village, nor brought up in one. It was only as a college student that I first began to understand what rural life was. But, over the years, especially after joining public service, I more than made up for that deficiency in my personality equipment.

Learning about life in India’s villages, and studying the conditions in which rural folk lived, became important objectives for me thereafter, especially after joining the administrative service. And, strangely enough, I ended up being called an expert in rural development!

There is much that divides the rural parts of India from the rest. Venkaiah Naidu, formerly the Vice President of India, who was my Minister when, in the 1990s, I was working as an Additional Secretary in the Ministry of Rural Development, felt a deep concern about that yawning divide.

And that led me to delve even more deeply into that phenomenon. Being a public servant, I developed a special interest in matters relating to governance in the rural areas.

More than 65 per cent of the population of India lives in rural areas. Therefore, the manner in which the phenomenon of governance manifests itself in our villages assumes considerable importance. Democracy was the form of governance which the visionary and foresighted political leaders, civil servants, and captains of industry wisely chose for the country in the formative years as of the newborn republic.

How well the democratic spirit today informs the electoral processes, the character and convictions of the political parties and the levels of political consciousness in the electorate, especially in the rural areas, is an issue of great significance.

During the freedom movement, and soon after the country became independent, it was upright, dedicated, and patriotic leaders, such as Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Patel and BR Ambedkar, who set about the task of shaping the destiny of the nation.

Sir Winston Churchill, the Prime Minister of Britain at the time when granting freedom to India was still only under consideration, was wary about the repercussions that might follow. He feared that power may then go, “to the hands of rascals, rogues, freebooters;… of low calibre and men of straw.… sweet tongues and silly hearts.…”, who would then “.... fight amongst themselves for power… India will be lost in political squabbles.”

While things may not have come to quite that stage yet, the fact remains that, as one looks around, the moral fibre, and patriotic fervor, of present political leaders, appear to leave much to be desired.

But then, lack of character and integrity is not a shortcoming peculiar to political leaders alone. Unfortunately, it is also found in some persons and in varying degrees, in many other spheres of public life, such as the judiciary, the civil services, professionals such as advocates, doctors and chartered accountants, and engineers; even in the field of academics, and in the scientific community, not to mention captains of industry and leading businessmen.

Wherever one looks, one finds that standards of rectitude, and intellectual honesty, are not quite what one would have expected them to be.

Having said that, however, it needs to be conceded that there is much that also warms the cockles of one’s heart. One only needs an unjaundiced approach to find that there are many, in the same areas, who still maintain their commitment to the principles of selfless public life, and devotion to the welfare of the people.

So far as the general public in the rural areas is concerned, they are becoming increasingly aware of their rights, and developing the ability critically to assess the performance potential of those contesting elections, thanks to the advantages the advent of the digital age has brought with it, and the consequent enhanced access to information.

As a result, increasingly, elections are being contested, and won, on the platform of issues, rather than the tested and tried foundation of caste-based politics and the role of money and liquor.

As witness, the fact that, in the 2024 elections, rural distress, and issues such as Minimum Support Price to farmers for agricultural crops, emerged as major drivers of voter behaviour, challenging the political dominance of national parties.

Among the most forward looking, and revolutionary, reforms, undertaken in the polity since Independence, have been the 73rd and 74th amendments to the Constitution of India. What they did, in short, was to grant constitutional status to the rural Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRI)s and Urban Local Bodies (ULB)s.

Among other things, they provided for a three tier system for the PRIs, mandatory elections to all local bodies, and, significantly, reservations for SCs/STs and women and fixed five year tenure for elected representatives.

They also mandated the creation of State Election Commissions and State Finance Commissions, to ensure the administrative functionality, and financial stability, of local bodies. As a result, marginalised groups, such as the Schedule Castes, the Schedule Tribes and women, were able to enjoy the advantage of increased political awareness and greater participation in decision – making, becoming more vocal about their rights and asserting their political identity.

If that is one side of the story, the flipside presents quite a few pernicious issues which persist, the statutory and constitutional initiatives notwithstanding.

The reservation, for instance, for women in political offices at all levels, has, regrettably, become a bit of a farce, in most cases.

The male family members continue to dictate decision making, while the women representatives function merely as proxies for their husbands.

The scourge of the traditional caste system affecting political choices and voters aligning with candidates from their own community, in expectation of direct benefits, unfortunately, also continues to a substantial extent.

As observed by RamuSarma,formerly Editor ofthis newspaperin many parts of rural India, “the political DNA remains trapped in a cycle of criminalisation, cast and dynasticism…… breeds entitlement, weakens meritocracy and creates an informal hierarchy where loyalty to the family outweighs loyalty to the people. Sarma goes on to add that “political parties …. claim to champion ‘young blood’….”, but when it comes to choosing candidates for elections, the same “….outdated, regressive leaders, corner the seats. Youth are asked to clap, canvas, and campaign – not lead.Democracy cannot survive on symbolism. It needs substance – leaders who serve and rule; parties that build, but not divide and votes who think, not trade.”

That, more or less, is the sum and substance of how the democratic spirit is unveiling itself, particularly in the places where Gandhi said that India lives!

By way of ending this rather dry discussion on a humorous note, here is a story I heard, making the rounds in journalistic circles.

In a well-known Communist country, telling political jokes is regarded as a type of extreme sport and a potentially capital offense. A judge is seen walking out of his chambers laughing his head off. When a colleague asks him why, the judge says,

“I just heard the funniest joke in the world!”

“Well, go ahead, tell me!” says the other judge.

I can’t is the reply, “I just gave someone ten years for it!”

(The writer was formerly Chief Secretary, Government of Andhra Pradesh)